Your Unpopular Football Opinions

[7DnBrnc53]

Fans are a peculiar lot. I can't imagine the joy of my team winning a championship being outweighed by anger that they weren't given enough respect beforehand -- and then stewing in that anger for almost three decades.

Oh, geez. I am not stewing in any anger. I am just pointing out the truth about how that team was disrespected before the game.

[RichardBak]

I know you guys don't agree. but the 96 Pack were an overrated team (although slightly better than the 97 version). Denver and Jacksonville would have defeated them, and the Pats could have as well if Parcells' heart was in it (a Pat fan on Reddit said that he may have threw that SB. He had one foot out the door, and would leave for the Jets after the game).

Well, this is the unpopular opinion thread. So kudos for being in the proper spirit of things. That’s a whopper.

What do you mean, a whopper? I rode on a bus just a few years ago with a guy who said the same thing, so that confirms it.

Many people are saying....

[Oszuscik]

The Packers took care of SF easily in the championship game and had beaten the Broncos 41-6 just the season before.

The late-90's 49ers weren't as good as people thought. Their defense used to beat on weak sisters every year in a terrible division. Also, Elway didn't play in that 41-6 game, and TD only played a half. Denver wasn't trying to win that game.

I know you guys don't agree. but the 96 Pack were an overrated team (although slightly better than the 97 version). Denver and Jacksonville would have defeated them, and the Pats could have as well if Parcells' heart was in it (a Pat fan on Reddit said that he may have threw that SB. He had one foot out the door, and would leave for the Jets after the game).

Oh boy.

Quarterbacked by the back-to-back league MVP. Offense scored the most points in the league. Defense surrendered the least amount of points in the league. Top-ranked defense in the league. Special teams had six return TDs including playoffs. That '96 team was lethal.

The '97 Packers, on the other hand, I'd concede were an overrated team. Still fully capable of beating Denver, but now merely a good team instead of a great team. The offensive trio of Brett Favre, Antonio Freeman, and Dorsey Levens was terrific, but the special teams lost their magic without Desmond Howard, and the defense began to show its age. Sean Jones retired, Reggie White dealt with a bad back, Eugene Robinson lost a step, a washed-up Seth Joyner replaced Wayne Simmons, Gilbert Brown let his weight get out of control, and Craig Newsome was lost for the season in Week 1.

[Ten Minute Ticker]

I’m a Packer fan and I thought the spread in ‘97 was too big too. I warned everyone I knew the game would be close.

That said, the ‘97 Packers could very easily had won it all. And nearly did. Denver was not appreciable better as the game itself demonstrated.

[7DnBrnc53]

Oh boy.

Quarterbacked by the back-to-back league MVP. Offense scored the most points in the league. Defense surrendered the least amount of points in the league. Top-ranked defense in the league. Special teams had six return TDs including playoffs. That '96 team was lethal.

The '97 Packers, on the other hand, I'd concede were an overrated team. Still fully capable of beating Denver, but now merely a good team instead of a great team. The offensive trio of Brett Favre, Antonio Freeman, and Dorsey Levens was terrific, but the special teams lost their magic without Desmond Howard, and the defense began to show its age. Sean Jones retired, Reggie White dealt with a bad back, Eugene Robinson lost a step, a washed-up Seth Joyner replaced Wayne Simmons, Gilbert Brown let his weight get out of control, and Craig Newsome was lost for the season in Week 1.

The 96 Pack were 4-3 against teams that finished .500 or better. They barely beat an overrated SF team at home, and they beat Denver without Elway (and TD didn't play the second half. Denver played well early on in that game). The Broncos and Jags were the best teams by the end of that season.

Also, maybe Jones and Simmons would have made somewhat of a difference the next year, but Craig Newsome wasn't that great (should have drafted Bobby Taylor instead). Also, they did have Darren Sharper at S besides Robinson and Butler, so they were stronger at that position than the year before (they were also healthier on the OL in 97).

[Oszuscik]

Oh boy.

Quarterbacked by the back-to-back league MVP. Offense scored the most points in the league. Defense surrendered the least amount of points in the league. Top-ranked defense in the league. Special teams had six return TDs including playoffs. That '96 team was lethal.

The '97 Packers, on the other hand, I'd concede were an overrated team. Still fully capable of beating Denver, but now merely a good team instead of a great team. The offensive trio of Brett Favre, Antonio Freeman, and Dorsey Levens was terrific, but the special teams lost their magic without Desmond Howard, and the defense began to show its age. Sean Jones retired, Reggie White dealt with a bad back, Eugene Robinson lost a step, a washed-up Seth Joyner replaced Wayne Simmons, Gilbert Brown let his weight get out of control, and Craig Newsome was lost for the season in Week 1.

The 96 Pack were 4-3 against teams that finished .500 or better. They barely beat an overrated SF team at home, and they beat Denver without Elway (and TD didn't play the second half. Denver played well early on in that game). The Broncos and Jags were the best teams by the end of that season.

Also, maybe Jones and Simmons would have made somewhat of a difference the next year, but Craig Newsome wasn't that great (should have drafted Bobby Taylor instead). Also, they did have Darren Sharper at S besides Robinson and Butler, so they were stronger at that position than the year before (they were also healthier on the OL in 97).

The Packers finished 13-3 in '96, which is a pretty good record. Would it have been better if their 3 losses occurred against teams that finished below .500?

Overrated or not, the 49ers were still the 49ers, and the Packers beat them twice that season (not to mention in the Divisional Round the year prior, and in the Championship Game the year after).

The argument that the Packers' win against the Broncos in '96 is lessened because Elway sat out doesn't really make sense to me. Elway didn't play, Davis played half the game, but they lost 41-6. Did Shannon Sharpe, Bill Romanowski, Tyrone Braxton, and Steve Atwater all dog it during that game? When you lose by 35 points I think you have to admit that it just wasn't going to happen for you that day regardless of who played.

Craig Newsome's injury in 1997 basically ruined his career, but before that he was a very effective, physical cornerback. In 1995, his rookie year, he had 85 tackles and 19 passes defensed, and in 1996 he logged 71 tackles and 23 passes defensed. He was an important part of that defense, the same as Wayne Simmons. Unfortunately, the Packers tired of Simmons' personality, and thought Seth Joyner would be an upgrade as far as rushing the passer. He was not, and he couldn't get physical with TEs like Simmons could. Newsome and Simmons were both missed in '97. Also, Sharper may have joined the team in '97, but he didn't become a good player until 2000. He was awful his first few years, and besides a few scoring plays where he was in the right place at the right time he didn't factor much in 1997. Butler and Robinson held down the safety positions, while Mike Prior played the nickelback all season, and both Robinson and Prior were losing a step that year (with Prior falling all the way off the cliff in '98).

I enjoy the debate, I don't want to come across as attacking your point of view, but I just don't agree with calling the '96 Packers overrated - if anything, in the grand scheme of things, I think that team gets overlooked. But the 1997 Packers that your Broncos beat? Yes, I think they were overrated. A very good, but no longer great, team.

[74_75_78_79_]

Oh boy.

Quarterbacked by the back-to-back league MVP. Offense scored the most points in the league. Defense surrendered the least amount of points in the league. Top-ranked defense in the league. Special teams had six return TDs including playoffs. That '96 team was lethal.

The '97 Packers, on the other hand, I'd concede were an overrated team. Still fully capable of beating Denver, but now merely a good team instead of a great team. The offensive trio of Brett Favre, Antonio Freeman, and Dorsey Levens was terrific, but the special teams lost their magic without Desmond Howard, and the defense began to show its age. Sean Jones retired, Reggie White dealt with a bad back, Eugene Robinson lost a step, a washed-up Seth Joyner replaced Wayne Simmons, Gilbert Brown let his weight get out of control, and Craig Newsome was lost for the season in Week 1.

The 96 Pack were 4-3 against teams that finished .500 or better. They barely beat an overrated SF team at home, and they beat Denver without Elway (and TD didn't play the second half. Denver played well early on in that game). The Broncos and Jags were the best teams by the end of that season.

Also, maybe Jones and Simmons would have made somewhat of a difference the next year, but Craig Newsome wasn't that great (should have drafted Bobby Taylor instead). Also, they did have Darren Sharper at S besides Robinson and Butler, so they were stronger at that position than the year before (they were also healthier on the OL in 97).

The Packers finished 13-3 in '96, which is a pretty good record. Would it have been better if their 3 losses occurred against teams that finished below .500?

Overrated or not, the 49ers were still the 49ers, and the Packers beat them twice that season (not to mention in the Divisional Round the year prior, and in the Championship Game the year after).

The argument that the Packers' win against the Broncos in '96 is lessened because Elway sat out doesn't really make sense to me. Elway didn't play, Davis played half the game, but they lost 41-6. Did Shannon Sharpe, Bill Romanowski, Tyrone Braxton, and Steve Atwater all dog it during that game? When you lose by 35 points I think you have to admit that it just wasn't going to happen for you that day regardless of who played.

Craig Newsome's injury in 1997 basically ruined his career, but before that he was a very effective, physical cornerback. In 1995, his rookie year, he had 85 tackles and 19 passes defensed, and in 1996 he logged 71 tackles and 23 passes defensed. He was an important part of that defense, the same as Wayne Simmons. Unfortunately, the Packers tired of Simmons' personality, and thought Seth Joyner would be an upgrade as far as rushing the passer. He was not, and he couldn't get physical with TEs like Simmons could. Newsome and Simmons were both missed in '97. Also, Sharper may have joined the team in '97, but he didn't become a good player until 2000. He was awful his first few years, and besides a few scoring plays where he was in the right place at the right time he didn't factor much in 1997. Butler and Robinson held down the safety positions, while Mike Prior played the nickelback all season, and both Robinson and Prior were losing a step that year (with Prior falling all the way off the cliff in '98).

I enjoy the debate, I don't want to come across as attacking your point of view, but I just don't agree with calling the '96 Packers overrated - if anything, in the grand scheme of things, I think that team gets overlooked. But the 1997 Packers that your Broncos beat? Yes, I think they were overrated. A very good, but no longer great, team.

Perhaps the Pack in '97 were 'very good' until the wake-up-call shocker at Indy, and then they were 'great' again from there though not as great as the year prior.

As for the 1996 version - what they were to the '90s, the '86 Giants were to the '80s. Truly great team, a 'real' Super Bowl champ, but the problem was there were even greater, more-Historic teams in the vicinity. '84 SF, '85 Bears, '89 SF overshadowing NYG as Jimmy's Boys and that team that "got the monkey off" someone's back overshadowing the Pack.

No disgrace either way. Still two great Historic-enough teams and are not overrated with me.

PS - as for that late Den@GB game though, I don't know, not having Elway in there I'd think would have to make a chain-reaction of difference. I'm not saying they were better or would have won, but that's simply just too much a notable to ignore. Nothing against who his backup was that game, but a big drop-off! I've said it before and will say it again, I would have liked for that to have been a meaningful game which Elway starts. And, even better, the two meeting again in the Big Easy weeks later!

[CSKreager]

Oh boy.

Quarterbacked by the back-to-back league MVP. Offense scored the most points in the league. Defense surrendered the least amount of points in the league. Top-ranked defense in the league. Special teams had six return TDs including playoffs. That '96 team was lethal.

The '97 Packers, on the other hand, I'd concede were an overrated team. Still fully capable of beating Denver, but now merely a good team instead of a great team. The offensive trio of Brett Favre, Antonio Freeman, and Dorsey Levens was terrific, but the special teams lost their magic without Desmond Howard, and the defense began to show its age. Sean Jones retired, Reggie White dealt with a bad back, Eugene Robinson lost a step, a washed-up Seth Joyner replaced Wayne Simmons, Gilbert Brown let his weight get out of control, and Craig Newsome was lost for the season in Week 1.

The 96 Pack were 4-3 against teams that finished .500 or better. They barely beat an overrated SF team at home, and they beat Denver without Elway (and TD didn't play the second half. Denver played well early on in that game). The Broncos and Jags were the best teams by the end of that season.

The Jags weren’t one of the best teams by the end of 96, they were just lucky

[7DnBrnc53]

The Jags weren’t one of the best teams by the end of 96, they were just lucky

They were because of the missed kick, but they were maturing late in the season. Once they got in, they were dangerous. They put a running game on the Bills like nobody did from 1990-93, and they knocked off the #1 seed Broncos.

As for NE, I don't know what happened. Maybe the Bronco win was their SB, and they got complacent. They would have won the SB if they beat the Pats.

[Brian wolf]

The Patriots just shut the Jags down. Listening to the broadcast, it felt like the Patriots pumped in noise to distract their offense and McGinest got a pass rush on Boselli that Bruce Smith couldnt do in the wild card game. I also dont feel the Jags would have beaten the Packers in the SB. In the SB, Parcells got out-coached by Holmgren. He overestimated his QB Bledsoe, rather than running Curtis Martin more, though the Packers stuffed their offensive line.